N the intolerant group than within the group resistant to prior lines (33 vs. 14 ). Patients who necessary a dose reduction had anPleural /pericLoAbdodiminNaadalFausrhea1/Cancers 2023, 15,For non-hematologic toxicities (Figure 4b), the distinction in frequency of AEs seemed to favor of asciminib for the percentage of cardiovascular events (0 vs. five.6 ), pleural/pericardial effusion (five.two vs. 13.9 ), diarrhea (1.three vs. 13.9 ), and edema (two.7 vs. 13.9 ). The differences observed for the rate of arthralgias (11.7 vs. ten.5 ), headache (1.3 vs. 7 ), loss of appetite (two.6 vs. 7 ), abdominal pain (5.2 vs. eight.0 ), fatigue (18.two vs. 14.3 ), nausea (7.8 vs. 11.8 ), vomiting (two.6 vs. six.three ), pancreatitis (2.6 vs. two ), and rash (5.2 vs. eight.0 ) have been significantly less pronounced.7 ofCancers 2023, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW8 of(a)(b)Figure four. (a) Frequency of hematologic toxicity with preceding TKI versus asciminib. (b) Frequency Figure 4. (a) Frequency toxicity with preceding TKI versus asciminib. InTKI versusto brown: the (b) Frequency of extra-hematologic of hematologic toxicity with prior pale orange asciminib. reported frequency toxicity with prior lines prior to asciminib. In pale the initial to of extra-hematologicof cytopenias for the unique TKI versus asciminib. TKI1 refers toorange line brown: the of therapy and TKI2 for the successive lines. All previous lines correspond to one of the classical reported frequency of cytopenias nilotinib,different lines before asciminib.Glycoprotein/G Protein supplier the frequency for the initial line for the bosutinib, or ponatinib.BDNF Protein custom synthesis In blue colour: TKI1 refers reTKIs: either imatinib, dasatinib, of treatmentwith asciminib.PMID:24187611 for the successive lines. All earlier lines correspond to on the list of classical ported and TKI2Cross-toxicity with earlier TKIs was analyzed for the most frequent AEs observed with asciminib (Table 2). toxicities (Figure 4b), considerable for thrombocytopenia of AEs seemed For non-hematologic This danger was statistically the distinction in frequency (43 vs. two ), anemia (22 vs. four.six ), neutropenia (21 vs. 1.7 ), fatigue (35 vs. 12 ), vomitto favor of asciminib for the percentage of cardiovascular events (0 vs. 5.six ), pleuing (16.6 vs. 0 ), and pancreatitis (33 vs. 0 ). Cross-toxicity will not seem to influence ral/pericardial effusion (5.2 vs. 13.9 ), diarrhea (1.3 vs. 13.9 ), and edema (two.7 vs. the occurrence of cardiovascular events, edema, abdominal discomfort, diarrhea, or rash. Cross13.9 ). The variations observed for the in six of arthralgias effusion, pneumonitis, headache intolerance led to treatment discontinuation rate patients (pleural (11.7 vs. ten.5 ), (1.3 worseningloss of appetite (2.6 vs.and two situations of pancreatitis). This implies that of vs. 7 ), of PAD, thrombocytopenia, 7 ), abdominal discomfort (5.2 vs. eight.0 ), fatigue (18.two the total variety of treatment failure vomiting (two.6 vs. (6/7) did so as a result of (2.6 vs. 14.3 ), nausea (7.8 vs. 11.eight ), resulting from intolerance, 86 six.3 ), pancreatitis side vs. 2 ), effects that had currently led to treatment failure of a previous TKI.TKIs: either imatinib, dasatinib, nilotinib, bosutinib, or ponatinib. In blue color: the frequency three.2. Cross-Toxicity and Cross Intolerance reported with asciminib.and rash (5.2 vs. eight.0 ) were less pronounced. three.2. Cross-Toxicity and Cross IntoleranceCross-toxicity with earlier TKIs was analyzed for one of the most frequent AEs observed with asciminib (Table two). This risk was statistically important for thrombocytopenia (43 vs. 2 ), anemia (22.
